Punjab & Haryana High Court Reinstates Civil Judge Expelled From Service For Allegedly Abusing Court Staff

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has reinstated an Additional Civil Judge of Punjab, who was expelled from service in 2015 for allegedly abusing Ahlmad posted in his Court. The Judicial Officer was also charged for acting arbitrarily by not forwarding Ahlmad's appeal seeking promotion.

Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma found that the testimonies of the Court staff recorded by the enquiry officer for proving charge was not sufficient to prove that that the judicial officer used abusive and derogatory words against the Ahlmad.

Further the division bench found that no evidence could be found on record that the Judicial Officer with ill-will and malice did not forward the appeal of the Ahlmad seeking promotion for ten months.

It added further that if the Ahlmad was aggrieved by the Judicial Officer for not forwarding his appeal, he could have made complaint to the Session Judge but the same was not done.

The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by Additional Civil Judge, seeking quashing of the the recommendation made by the Disciplinary Committee and resolution passed by the Full Court to expel the judge.

The Judicial Officer was posted in Punjab's Balachaur on 2008 when the complaint was made by the Ahlamd that the judge allegedly used abusive and derogatory terms for him.

It was the judge's case that during his entire service, prior to the period in question, his integrity was found good by the Administrative Judges, and, that the adverse remarks were noted against the petitioner only in the ACR for the year 2008-2009, whereas, no adverse remarks became recorded by the Administrative Judge in the ACR of 2009-2010.

After examining the submissions, the Court found that the judge did not misbehave with any staff in the time period he was posted in Balachaur.

The Court noted that the testimony of the copyist who stated in his testimony that the altercation took place between the Ahlmad and the judge, cannot be taken as absolute truth.

"Even otherwise, before the Enquiry Officer-cum-Registrar (Vigilance), he was not subjected to cross-examination therebys the previous statement made by him before the above, cannot be said to be containing the absolute truth with respect to the relevant incident, especially when despite his becoming confronted with Ex. PW-7/A (copyist), upon his being cross-examined by the petitioner, thus then to a query being put to him, he categorically stated that he had not overheard the purported derogatory remarks, as were made by the petitioner against the complainant," the Court said.

It further said that the reader in his testimony exonerated the judge and also supported his statement in the cross-examination.

The bench found that, "Resultantly, the relevant imputation of misconduct against the present petitioner, thus even on the preponderance of probabilities, rather was neither required to be answered against the present petitioner, nor could be construed to be proven against the present petitioner."

In the light of the above, the Court allowed the plea and setaside the impugned order, stating that "the petitioner is ordered to be forthwith reinstated in service along with all consequential benefits excepting monetary benefits."

Mr. D.S.Patwalia, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Rishu Bajaj, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab for respondent No. 1.

Mr. Gaurav Chopra, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Ranjit Singh Kalra, Advocate and

Ms. Mona Yadav, Advocate for respondent No. 2.;

Title: Sangeet Pal Singh v. State of Punjab and another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 320

Click here to read/download the order